Site is 3 years old, is this where it ends?

So on the 23rd the site became 3 years old
Barely anyone posts anymore, including me
Most have stopped checking the forum on a daily basis

The clan is 4 years old, but as far as i know no one who comes here still plays wc3 on a regular basis or uses the clan name for any other games
So the site seems to be dead
Ive tried posting about stuff, mostly in the Other Games section, but it gets very few replys (usually 0) and no one seems interested in playing other games
Ive thought about posting about anime or tv shows but i really dont think those will get much of a response either
Even maze tried posting a bunch of random stuff and that didnt really help either

Ive always said this site/clan will be forever, but after thinking about it this site/clan isnt really doing anything even if it does last forever so whats the point
The only game people here seem to be playing regularly is LoL and they havent used/needed this site
The clan name isnt used in any game except wc3, which no one here is playing a lot anymore, i intended to make it for sc2, but i wont have time to be chief of an active clan by the time sc2 has proper clan support, and no one else would want to do it
No one is interested in posting anything, the majority of the people that check the site dont actually post, they read, which would be fine, if there were people posting stuff to read

Which is why i think it may be time to shut the site down
We had a good run and some fun times, but nothing lasts forever and you cant force it to
So everyone vote in the poll, if you vote that the site shouldnt be shut down explain why

In about a week if the vote is yes the site will be gone but the chat will still exist and you can go directly to it with the link thats at the top of the chatbox
If the vote is no then what happens depends on what people say for why they dont want it to shut down, if people vote no without explaining why then the site will be shut down anyway

I'd say leave the chat up, ill check back every once in a while.

Maybe make the website link to the chat soooo when I browse

tmmm.forumotion.com it goes to the chat instead. But I kind of agree, no one uses this forum anymore and well, there isn't a whole lot of reasons I need to use it anymore. The only real reason I used the forum was to get help on stuff, but once I learned how to research on the computer and once the internet picked up, really didn't need help figuring out how to do stuff anymore lol.

but yeah, I think the sites basically dead. I'll probably join some artists forum lol. But hey add me on steam: Amaz1439 I get on and play every now and then. + I'll probably design a video game later in life.

Wow gloomy guys over here. My last few days have been me being raped by exam after exam and project after project, and i suspect for you guys it has been the same...
I think at around summer time people will probably post more. I check the forums like twice a day (coz i have no friends and every moment of my life is agony, oh wait no... thats Kallock ). And now that u posted this thread anything i post from now on will seem like i posted it coz u said this.... Also WHY WOULD U SHUT IT DOWN RIGHT BEFORE DIABLO 3 AND SC2 HOTS COMES OUT!!!

Frankly i blame amaz for suggesting the idea in the first place and corrupting pat. Pat you can`t trust these artists, they think they know more than us and we should probably murder them all.

I say no. Whether we play a game or not, which I would be glad to if someone else wants to play, I'd love to keep in touch. I've known most of you since either 7th or 8th grade, and I'm now a senior in high school. That's a long time to just quit the site and forget about each other. I tried getting other people to play WC3, but it didn't work out. I seriously do not understand how some of you can not have ANY time to play. Do you go to school and work three jobs, or what? But anyway, there are still some people that have time to play, and this is a good site to contact them so we can play something. As I've said before, I'll occasionally use the site gamefaqs.com, and when a board is dead they don't just delete it, they keep it for the people that do still care about it. And who knows, maybe someday the people that don't have time to play a game or two will get time and we can play a game or two every so often.

EatBaconDaily wrote:

Wow gloomy guys over here.

perfect description of this thread.

but i voted no because i usually check this website once a day to see wat ppl are talkin about, but none of the recent topics have been interesting enough for me to respond to.

Pat1487 wrote:

Ive thought about posting about anime or tv shows but i really dont think those will get much of a response either

I'd be interested in hearing some of those tv shows, im all caught up on all of the shows i watch (which is about 15). idk about animes tho.. the only "anime" ive even come close to liking was avatar the last airbender, which is one of the best shows ive ever seen.

The guy above me is drop'n truth bombs on us all.

Quote :

avatar the last airbender

I don`t know if thats really an anime (even though thta shwo fuckign RULEZ)`

And i just figured our Pats fiendish plan!
1. Pretend to want to close the website so people post more
2. murder babies and feed them to their mothers....

Thats all i got so far

I'm not sure why you would just get rid of it. Even if people arent playing, the forums are good for looking up old topics and tutorials. Plus, im really busy around this time of the year because of school and track. I still check the forums every day and respond if I have time or have interest in the topic.

Eat_bacon_daily wrote:

Also WHY WOULD U SHUT IT DOWN RIGHT BEFORE DIABLO 3 AND SC2 HOTS COMES OUT!!!

Because I dont think the release of those games will change anything
The same thing that happened when sc2 released will happen

Eat_bacon_daily wrote:

Frankly i blame amaz for suggesting the idea in the first place and corrupting pat

Ive thought about this long before amaz said anything
Everytime someone makes a thread where im the only person to respond, or when i make a thread that gets 0-1 replys is when i would think about it
I figured it would pass eventually and it would be like old times
But once 5 days past without any posts i realized that probably wont happen

Eat_bacon_daily wrote:

And now that u posted this thread anything i post from now on will seem like i posted it coz u said this

I guess some of what you post might be because of this, considering no one has posted anything in 5 days
I dont want it to feel like your forced to post stuff here, but if this makes you feel forced to post then you didnt want to post in the first place, which validates what im saying about getting rid of the site, since no one wants to post anymore

mazemasta77 wrote:

I'd love to keep in touch. I've known most of you since either 7th or 8th grade, and I'm now a senior in high school. That's a long time to just quit the site and forget about each other.

The chat would still be there, it would function the same way it does now, you would just need to go to a different link to get to it
The chat is really all people use anymore anyway

mazemasta77 wrote:

As I've said before, I'll occasionally use the site gamefaqs.com, and when a board is dead they don't just delete it, they keep it for the people that do still care about it. And who knows, maybe someday the people that don't have time to play a game or two will get time and we can play a game or two every so often.

It has people using other areas of it
It was like the way we had the archives here or most of the other sections that no one has posted in, even though no one was using them they were still available to see/use
But it has come to the point where no one is using any of the sections, gamefaqs would shut down to if that happened over a long enough period

Kallock wrote:

but i voted no because i usually check this website once a day to see wat ppl are talkin about, but none of the recent topics have been interesting enough for me to respond to.

I'd be interested in hearing some of those tv shows, im all caught up on all of the shows i watch (which is about 15). idk about animes tho.. the only "anime" ive even come close to liking was avatar the last airbender, which is one of the best shows ive ever seen.

If none of the topics are interesting enough you could try making your own about 1 of those tv shows, or your top 5 shows list or w/e you find interesting

Eat_bacon_daily wrote:

1. Pretend to want to close the website so people post more

Its not pretend and its not intended to force people to post more

BackseatDriver wrote:

I'm not sure why you would just get rid of it. Even if people arent playing, the forums are good for looking up old topics and tutorials. Plus, im really busy around this time of the year because of school and track. I still check the forums every day and respond if I have time or have interest in the topic.

Does anyone here really need those tutorials anymore
No one is doing anything that those tutorials help with, and even if they were they probably memorized it by now
The most looked up tutorial on the site is the Portal 2 split screen one
Thats from random people just searching google

I know people are too busy to play games, im 1 of them
But too busy to make 1 post a day, that seems unlikely
If you have no interest in anything people are talking about make a new post about something interesting to you

Pat1487 wrote:

If you have no interest in anything people are talking about make a new post about something interesting to you

I think that people post interesting things, it is just the fact that the forum is basically dead and that is the reason people don't post.

I don't see the problem really... Using just the chat wouldn't hinder much, people rarely use the damn forum as it is lol.

AmAzIn[G] wrote:

I think that people post interesting things, it is just the fact that the forum is basically dead and that is the reason people don't post.

Thats stupid amaz
In order for the forum to become dead, people would have had to stop posting first
So being dead doesnt cause people to not post, its the result of people not posting

It could have recovered if people started posting again but they didnt
You're too quick to give up on stuff



So far the reasons we have for not shutting the site down are:
New games are coming out
Keeping in touch
Looking up old tutorials/posts

All of which ive addressed in my last post

I think pat's just having a bad come-down from an ecstasy trip.
Once his serotonin levels go back up we'll all all be able to breath easy again.

Spoiler:

But for seriousez.
I prefer to think of myself as forcibly silent as opposed to willfully inactive.
My problem is that I'm always busy except for a couple odd hours in the middle of the day (like now).
And during the weekends I'm either (trying) to catch up on work or doing super responsible other activities.
Plus, I cant even post in half the topics cuz their all about the StarMind and CaftCraft shit.
But, I had a point. And that is...
Okay i don't really have a point, but it's true that we shouldn't close the site.
1: I fuck'n say so.
2: The fact that there anyone posted here shows people still care. We just dont all care as much as you would like pat. WE'RE GIVING YOU EVERYTHING WE HAVE! CANT YOU JUST ACCEPT THAT AND LOVE US FOR WHO WE ARE?
3: I fuck'n said so. See what i did there? I didn't do anything except modify one of the words and i managed to make it past-tense whilst still being grammatically correct. what a pro.
4: We established I'm a pro, which isn't it's own reason, but it does add weight to everything I say.
5: I think having a forum is fun, and im pretty sure most people agree with me, just cuz we arnt as good forum'ers as you would like, doesn't mean you should punish us. (This ties in with item #2)
6: Everything that's on the internet is forever. Don't break the internet-law, pat.

dont argue with pat, he always wins !

Eat_bacon_daily wrote:

Quote :

avatar the last airbender

I don`t know if thats really an anime (even though thta shwo fuckign RULEZ)`

And i just figured our Pats fiendish plan!
1. Pretend to want to close the website so people post more
2. murder babies and feed them to their mothers....

Thats all i got so far

a prequel series is coming out april 14th
i so excited

Quote :

a prequel series is coming out april 14th
i so excited

ITS APRILS 14th???? I thought i was like december. OMG GAME OF THRONES AND NOW AVATAR, APRIL IS GANNA BE A BALLER ASS MONTH!

Eat_bacon_daily wrote:

Quote :

a prequel series is coming out april 14th
i so excited

ITS APRILS 14th???? I thought i was like december. OMG GAME OF THRONES AND NOW AVATAR, APRIL IS GANNA BE A BALLER ASS MONTH!

yah and i meant sequel not prequel
first two episodes also released online
https://www.facebook.com/legendofkorra

By the way Pat, you know those random posts I made 'cause no one was posting anything? That stupid head Slaya actually tried insulting me over those. Needless to say, I got some good lulz in.

Pat1487 wrote:

AmAzIn[G] wrote:

I think that people post interesting things, it is just the fact that the forum is basically dead and that is the reason people don't post.

Thats stupid amaz
In order for the forum to become dead, people would have had to stop posting first
So being dead doesnt cause people to not post, its the result of people not posting

It could have recovered if people started posting again but they didnt
You're too quick to give up on stuff



So far the reasons we have for not shutting the site down are:
New games are coming out
Keeping in touch
Looking up old tutorials/posts

All of which ive addressed in my last post

I guess I didn't communicate my point well enough lol. What I had meant in saying that the forum is dead is that the original purpose of the forum was a place for our clan to communicate outside of war3 and other games, and we had both an active community of gamers and posters. Now that most of us are too busy to play games, we simply come to the forum and post as a way of staying in contact with those we used to play games with. In this sense the forum is dead from its function 3 years ago. People do not post the same things they posted 3 years ago and they never will. At least not in the sense of posting about war3, maybe they will post about sc2 in a similar way, but I'm pessimistic in the sense to think that there will be a huge revival in all of us to game down the road or to even post more often.

This probably makes much more sense then my one sentence above. I'll start communicating my ideas more thoroughly in the future.
I can obviously see that you would have had no idea what I had meant with that one sentence, but yet I assumed you would have known what I said in this paragraph in that one sentence without even thinking about it lol.

All in all, It won't affect my daily routine if the forum is taken down and I'd still be able to talk and keep in touch via chat and that is all I really care about.

AmAzIn[G] wrote:

I guess I didn't communicate my point well enough lol.

That's because you're as obviously drunk, high, or (newly apparently) spazzing on shrooms as rick perry is drunk. Ricky Perr

But more to the point, I don't think there should be a chatybox without the forummachine. They both complement each other nicely. Come for the forums, stay for the chat. So, even if one is performing deficientlly, it's not a reason to get all eugenics on it's ass. It's just like ability groups in school, when you recognize a smart kid outdoing a dumb kid, you don't then kill the dumb kid.
Cliff notes: taking down the forum is the same as murdering retarded children.
Check & Mate.

To be fair, it'd be more accurate to say "child"
but i prefer writing with plurals.
So, fuck that.

AmAzIn[G] wrote:

I guess I didn't communicate my point well enough lol. What I had meant in saying that the forum is dead is that the original purpose of the forum was a place for our clan to communicate outside of war3 and other games, and we had both an active community of gamers and posters. Now that most of us are too busy to play games, we simply come to the forum and post as a way of staying in contact with those we used to play games with. In this sense the forum is dead from its function 3 years ago. People do not post the same things they posted 3 years ago and they never will. At least not in the sense of posting about war3, maybe they will post about sc2 in a similar way, but I'm pessimistic in the sense to think that there will be a huge revival in all of us to game down the road or to even post more often.

This probably makes much more sense then my one sentence above. I'll start communicating my ideas more thoroughly in the future.
I can obviously see that you would have had no idea what I had meant with that one sentence, but yet I assumed you would have known what I said in this paragraph in that one sentence without even thinking about it lol.

All in all, It won't affect my daily routine if the forum is taken down and I'd still be able to talk and keep in touch via chat and that is all I really care about.

You never communicate your point well, at all
Until now, which is surprising

But even after we stopped playing people still posted, not as much, but there were still posts every day, it didnt start to get bad until around december
Not counting this thread, there hasnt been any posts in a week
And im not counting this thread because unless posting this thread caused people to not post then without this thread there wouldve been no posts for a week

Achilles.42 wrote:

But more to the point, I don't think there should be a chatybox without the forummachine. They both complement each other nicely. Come for the forums, stay for the chat. So, even if one is performing deficientlly, it's not a reason to get all eugenics on it's ass. It's just like ability groups in school, when you recognize a smart kid outdoing a dumb kid, you don't then kill the dumb kid.
Cliff notes: taking down the forum is the same as murdering retarded children.
Check & Mate.

To be fair, it'd be more accurate to say "child"
but i prefer writing with plurals.
So, fuck that.

No one stays for the chat though, just look at maze talking to hlw on the 28th
Hlw logged off before saying anything to maze, maybe without even seeing him since he didnt stay for the chat
It makes more sense to just come to chat since you would be sure to look to see if people were there before leaving

To relate that to your analogy
It would be like putting a really smart kid and a really dumb kid in the same class
The smart kid would get dragged down by the dumb kid since the dumb kid has no chance of catching up to the smart kid and it would be easier on the professor to just dumb the class down to accommodate for the dumb kid
Rather then dumbing the class down, if i were the professor, i would make the dumb kid withdraw from the class to give the smart kid the best education possible

Spoiler:

Pat1487 wrote:

To relate that to your analogy
It would be like putting a really smart kid and a really dumb kid in the same class
The smart kid would get dragged down by the dumb kid since the dumb kid has no chance of catching up to the smart kid and it would be easier on the professor to just dumb the class down to accommodate for the dumb kid
Rather then dumbing the class down, if i were the professor, i would make the dumb kid withdraw from the class to give the smart kid the best education possible

Lets just calm the fuck down for a second.
To be clear, the smart kid doesn't get dragged down, what happens if the teacher knows anything about how to structure a lesson/class, is that the smart kid will function in two main ways. Firstly, the smart kid will act as a role model for the dumb kid, which makes it far more likely for him to succeed than if he was with a bunch of other dumb kids. Secondly, the smart kid will work with the dumb kid in a tutoring capacity, which helps the dumb kid get better much faster in the class room, and also makes the smart kid master the material at a much higher level than he would otherwise (Slavin, 2006).

So, in essence, how fucking dare you try and turn my analogy against me. It's impossible.
There's a symbiotic relationship here between the forum and the chatbox.
And just like with the helicopter parents that think their smart kid is being destroyed by the dumb kid, and cant see how beneficial the relationship is for everyone... You also fail to see that for the sanctity of our integrity it's imperative that we keep these two wonderful entities entwined.

Works Cited:
Slavin, R. (2006). Development durring childhood and adolescence. In, Educational psychology: Theory and practice (pp. 274-314). New York, NY: Pearson Education, Inc.

Wow you really prepared for this, sources, citations and all
Im impressed

But how do you measure dumb or smart
To keep it simple, lets say theres a scale 1-10
That theory may work for kids who are close on the scale, say the smart kid in question is 8 and the dumb is 4, but when you have something like 10 and 1 no amount of tutelage from the smart kid will help the dumb one
The smart kid wont get any better trying to teach someone that cant understand the material

You yourself used the term retard, which implies 1-2 on that scale to me
Which is why i used "really smart kid" and really dumb kid" to express the extremes of that scale
And the chat and forum are extremes
The forum having no posts, and the chat getting most if not all of the attention

Also, who says the smart kid would want to tutor the dumb one
Theoretically it could happen, but in practice id be willing to bet the smart kid would more often then not want to avoid talking to the dumb one

Pat1487 wrote:

Wow you really prepared for this, sources, citations and all

The disturbing part is that i didn't need to look anything up for that. Sept the page number... But anyway...

Pat1487 wrote:

But how do you measure dumb or smart
To keep it simple, lets say theres a scale 1-10
That theory may work for kids who are close on the scale, say the smart kid in question is 8 and the dumb is 4, but when you have something like 10 and 1 no amount of tutelage from the smart kid will help the dumb one
The smart kid wont get any better trying to teach someone that cant understand the material

It's an interesting hypothesis, but unfortunately the research has shown no meaningful evidence that the dissonance between intelligence levels plays that great of a roll.
Furthermore, you wish to quantify the forum and chatbox as being on opposite ends of the spectrum, However, i would posit that on your scale of 1-10, both for the forum and chatbox, that sites like "ice" which have a very active forum with well over 10 fold posts, and a chatbox with users in the thousands, are far better examples of "10"s.
What this means is that your attempt to make matters simple for yourself and transfer the discussion to a realm of extremes that made your arguments simple, is now null and void, because the context of thinking of other forums and chatboxes makes it clear that we cant assign such values.
Both our chat box and our forum fall within a reasonable dissonance within one another, although you wish to discount this idea by pointing out how long it's been since people have posted, i would point out that value is worth is rarely determined with a heuristic that is based solely on the present moment, but instead adds weight by utilizing a utilitarian model of the summation of moments.

Pat1487 wrote:

You yourself used the term retard, which implies 1-2 on that scale to me
Which is why i used "really smart kid" and really dumb kid" to express the extremes of that scale

Yeah, but i only wanted to do that when it fit my purposes.
I know see the error of my ways.
Thank you for showing how mistaken i was to try and use extremes to give depth to what i was saying.

Pat1487 wrote:

Also, who says the smart kid would want to tutor the dumb one
Theoretically it could happen, but in practice id be willing to bet the smart kid would more often then not want to avoid talking to the dumb one

This is valid when social status is at stake.
However, in a well structured classroom the issue of social status can be effectively removed from being a determining factor in who students work with.
Basically, all the research suggests that people tend to want to teach others for a variety of reasons; to name a few: makes themselves feel smart, asserts dominance, boosts self esteem, people are inherently social creatures, etc. etc. ((Slavin, 2006) again).

Achilles.42 wrote:

Furthermore, you wish to quantify the forum and chatbox as being on opposite ends of the spectrum, However, i would posit that on your scale of 1-10, both for the forum and chatbox, that sites like "ice" which have a very active forum with well over 10 fold posts, and a chatbox with users in the thousands, are far better examples of "10"s. What this means is that your attempt to make matters simple for yourself and transfer the discussion to a realm of extremes that made your arguments simple, is now null and void, because the context of thinking of other forums and chatboxes makes it clear that we cant assign such values.

Extremes relative to the average as set by the excepted standard
The extremes on this forum are much less then extremes else where, as the average is lower
5 people using the chat box and 0 people using the forum are extremes here
Where on ice or other places the extremes would be much greater as the average is greater
Same goes for the analogy

Achilles.42 wrote:

Both our chat box and our forum fall within a reasonable dissonance within one another, although you wish to discount this idea by pointing out how long it's been since people have posted, i would point out that value is worth is rarely determined with a heuristic that is based solely on the present moment, but instead adds weight by utilizing a utilitarian model of the summation of moments.

It is true that the forums have been used more then the chat over the course of the sites existence
But that doesnt make it more valuable at the current time
The value of things constantly change regardless of how long theyve existed
You cant just add up the value of something over time to get an estimation of its total current worth
If you could then oil would be worthless and water would be priceless

Sometimes things just become obsolete/worthless regardless of how much value they once held or how long they held that value

Achilles.42 wrote:

This is valid when social status is at stake.
However, in a well structured classroom the issue of social status can be effectively removed from being a determining factor in who students work with.
Basically, all the research suggests that people tend to want to teach others for a variety of reasons; to name a few: makes themselves feel smart, asserts dominance, boosts self esteem, people are inherently social creatures, etc. etc. ((Slavin, 2006) again).

Social status isnt the reason smart kids would avoid dumb kids

Really Smart kids (9+ on that scale) tend to be socially awkward
Really Dumb kids (1-3 on that scale) tend to be aggressive (maybe not aggressive, but easily upset, or intimidated by intelligence, which may lead to aggression or frustration), for example if a smart kid uses sarcasm that a dumb kid missed without realizing it, it might piss them off depending on what was said
They tend not to get along is my point, and smart kids know this (hence the desire to avoid it)
As for wanting to teach/tutor, truly smart people rarely need to make themselves feel smart, those that are socially awkward arent social creatures, boosting self esteem doesnt work if the dumb kid makes fun of the smart kid for being smart, and asserting dominance over someone far less intelligent then you doesnt feel good (once you realize it), etc., etc.

Achilles.42 wrote:

It's an interesting hypothesis, but unfortunately the research has shown no meaningful evidence that the dissonance between intelligence levels plays that great of a roll.

I dont have fancy sources
So all i can do is argue the validity of this source and question how this research was done and with how many people (unless its all just theoretical, in which case i would argue that its wrong in its current wording)
If the people knew they were being researched then they will act differently to what they would normally
Even if they didnt know what the research was about, if you gathered them in 1 place they would suspect something (the smart ones would anyway) and act differently
It also depends on how smart the smart kids were and how dumb the dumb ones were (they may not have tested kids that were smart enough, or dumb enough)
If they were moderately dumb kids and moderately smart ones then i would agree with that theory, and would expect what it says to happen, but with the extremes, i would not

Theres too many variables involved to put forth the theory that this source puts forth without potentially having considerable inaccuracies

Pat1487 wrote:

Extremes relative to the average as set by the excepted standard
The extremes on this forum are much less then extremes else where, as the average is lower
5 people using the chat box and 0 people using the forum are extremes here
Where on ice or other places the extremes would be much greater as the average is greater
Same goes for the analogy

Interesting, however, even if what you said of the relationship between stupid and smart kids were true (i'll get to why it's not later) the important factor would still be the total dissonance, not the relative dissonance within a single school (or forum). For instance, if one kid has an IQ of 95, and another kid has an iq of 125, that's not a big difference at all, even though it's a huge one at imaginary high school.

Pat1487 wrote:

It is true that the forums have been used more then the chat over the course of the sites existence
But that doesnt make it more valuable at the current time
The value of things constantly change regardless of how long theyve existed
You cant just add up the value of something over time to get an estimation of its total current worth
If you could then oil would be worthless and water would be priceless

Sometimes things just become obsolete/worthless regardless of how much value they once held or how long they held that value

The water/oil analogy is forced and doesn't share enough commonality with the situation. What would be more accurate would be to think of you receiving all F's D's and C's for this semester. By your logic, you would have lost your worth (intelligence), however, any reasonable person would just accept that you're having troubles for some other reason that's separate from your worth/intelligence/post count and that your potential as a fundamental intelligent person is still present and giving you reason for us not to sterilize you for the good of humanity.

Pat1487 wrote:

Social status isnt the reason smart kids would avoid dumb kids

Really Smart kids (9+ on that scale) tend to be socially awkward

"Terman's research exploded the
myth that high-IQ individuals were brainy but physically and socially inept. In fact,
Terman found that children with outstanding IQs were larger, stronger, and better
coordinated than other children and became better adjusted and more emotionally
stable adults (Terman & Oden, 1959)" (Slavin, 2007).

Pat1487 wrote:

Really Dumb kids (1-3 on that scale) tend to be aggressive (maybe not aggressive, but easily upset, or intimidated by intelligence, which may lead to aggression or frustration), for example if a smart kid uses sarcasm that a dumb kid missed without realizing it, it might piss them off depending on what was said.

Qualities like aggression, and patience, are either weakly correlated or not correlated at all.
As for your sarcasm example, once people develop Rapport with each other, it's unlikely such jokes utilizing sarcasm will be that damaging. Also, before rapport is developed it's unlikely people will jump at each others throats just because of a slight offense.

Pat1487 wrote:

They tend not to get along is my point, and smart kids know this

And my point is that you trippin when you say such things.

Pat1487 wrote:

As for wanting to teach/tutor, truly smart people rarely need to make themselves feel smart

Everyone has a desire for their worth to be recognized. Why else would have things like Nobel prizes? You can make more for the case that smart people are actually more driven to show how smart they are then the opposite.

Pat1487 wrote:

those that are socially awkward aren't social creatures

People are inherently social. Even socially awkward people have a drive to find others they can develop relationships with. One of the only instances of people that are truely not driven by social status/interaction are people with schizoid disorder.

Pat1487 wrote:

boosting self esteem doesnt work if the dumb kid makes fun of the smart kid for being smart, and asserting dominance over someone far less intelligent then you doesnt feel good (once you realize it), etc., etc.

This is reasonable, except you have you have to think of the dynamics of a classroom. What is going to happen if he proves he cant work with the smart kids? as he does in your example. Obviously the teacher isn't going to let this go on (in most instances) and will likely force the student to work alone. Now, even if the child is stupid, he will likely be able to put 2 and 2 together and realize that now instead of being able to keep his head above water he is failing, and asserting dominance over the smart kid gave him nothing. And when he is given another opportunity to work together, it's unlikely he'll employ such self destructive tactics that give him nothing.
You see, ostracizing smart children predominantly occurs in classrooms where everyone is an individual working by them selves and therefore in competition with every other student, and since the dumb kids can never beat the smart kids, they get frustrated and lash out. However, when you make learning a group dynamic, this effect is removed, because now the dumb kid's feel as if the smart kids are their friends, because they help them avoid embarrassment in the classroom, therefore improving self esteem.

Pat1487 wrote:

I dont have fancy sources
So all i can do is argue the validity of this source and question how this research was done and with how many people (unless its all just theoretical, in which case i would argue that its wrong in its current wording)
If the people knew they were being researched then they will act differently to what they would normally
Even if they didnt know what the research was about, if you gathered them in 1 place they would suspect something (the smart ones would anyway) and act differently
It also depends on how smart the smart kids were and how dumb the dumb ones were (they may not have tested kids that were smart enough, or dumb enough)
If they were moderately dumb kids and moderately smart ones then i would agree with that theory, and would expect what it says to happen, but with the extremes, i would not

Theres too many variables involved to put forth the theory that this source puts forth without potentially having considerable inaccuracies

The source is psych textbook, which means it's utilizing a meta-analysis of a huge amount of unique research to argue for the overall theories. It's common for each sentence to have 1-5 sources after it (yeah, some times the list of names/dates is longer than the sentence it's self). Overall, i'd estimate that it's not flawless, but has a high degree of internal and external validity.

As for their being too many variables. The theories been applied to aid classrooms in numerous ways, and always comes out improving the learning experience for everyone. It's also been shown to help greatly reduce extreme divisions between racial/ethnic groups. Also, you MIGHT be right that the dissonance cant be too big, but 1, thats not ever been shown so far as i know, and 2, i still think that what i've said concerning the overall dissonance between the two items at stake is sufficient to show that they don't fall into such a category.